Theos-Talk Archives (December 1996 Message tl00137)

The Triaist wrote:

>In some cases, this (strive for balance) is true.  However, in most that I've
>encountered, women have realized this control that they have over men, and
>they use it to their full advantage.  Just IMO.  So, in actuality, society is
>going from one extreme to the other.  Either that or it has always been this
>way.  In fact, I often wonder if, for all these years, women have simply
>allowed men to believe that they are superior, by protesting chauvenism etc.,
>where, behind the scenes, the women have more control than they know what to
>do with.  Men are pawns.  Men are kings.  Men are bishops.  But the woman, the
>queen, is the most powerful piece on the board. (obvious allegory).  The woman
>protects the man for the man is weak, and may only move one space at a time.
>The knights, bishops, and pawns aren't there to protect the king, they are
>there to make way for the queen.  Make way for the kill.  For ages, the woman
>has been considered the manipulator, the protector, the power.  The man is
>simply the figurehead.  IMHO, of course.


I repeat:

What disturbs me the most, especially since I've been on this discussion
list, is that those who declare they are (and indeed seem to be)
intelligent, and aware that we all come from the same source, and know that
things are rarely as they seem, still hold on to these harmful prejudices.
And they have the sagacity to mask these thoughts in honeyed, complex
language, sometimes even calling forth the 'divine wisdom' as ally, and in
doing so, can also skillfully evade direct accusations.  I see it in your
posts and I've seen it in others.

The question is not "Is it ignorance?" but "Is it willful ignorance?"


Kym

Never suffer fools gladly.